Would you swap Eli for Luck right now?

Peyton's age is a much bigger factor when you're deciding between Peyton/Luck and Eli/Luck.

Rationally, any GM would take Luck right now over Eli right now going forward if they're building a team.. but it's at least worthy of a discussion. The Colts situation was a no brainer. Peyton only has a couple years left. You don't pass on Luck for that. And Peyton also has 1 title to Eli's 2 in 6 years more service time.

And when you have 10 and 15 points respectively when you take the field for those last drives, you also got a lot of help to still be in position to win with one score

to me isn't really quantifiable in a stat. And it's not a word I often use anyway.

But...Romo missing a wide open Austin to seal the Giants season and give his team the division is the definition of un-clutch.

If Kobe misses all his 4th quarter shots, but hits the one at the buzzer to win the game that's clutch IMO and the stats won't show it and I don't care.

And you know hoops far better than me, but in Boston at least, Lebron had a reputation for not being clutch because allegedly he didn't even want to (or wouldn't) take that last second shot to propel his team to win. he'd look to pass or they'd draw up some other option.

If that's not clutch, then it's what I mean if I ever use the word, which I rarely do.

but not when you analyze Brady's career?

I'll give you another number:

Historic, incredible play made in game winning Super Bowl final drive while trailing:

Eli: 2
Everyone else in NFL history: 0

In the biggest moment Eli has twice come through in improbable ways that are unprecedented in the history of the sport. That is indisputable and nothing can be said to marginalize it.

Quote:

And Peyton also has 1 title to Eli's 2 in 6 years more service time.

Seriously? Eli has been a better player than Peyton, or more instrumental to his team's overall success, or more valuable to his team, than Peyton? On what planet. Great that Eli has two SB MVPs... how many full season MVPs does he have? Vs Peyton's 3?

Eli also has a couple of one and dones in the POs, and vs Philly in '08 he stunk up the house.

made the decision to go after Luck when Manning was sidelined for an entire year and was getting TREATMENT IN EUROPE for his neck injury. At the time, the advice given to him was to retire.

That's a completely different scenario than saying we'd trade a player in his prime for a guy in year 2.

how little the Patriots scored in those two Super Bowls, why was Eli's Giants trailing during both of those final drives?

Quote:

And the problem with Romo and being great with the score close late is it wouldn't have been close if he didn't throw three first quarter picks. You dig a hole so big the defense lets up, your stats look better and you now get credit for it?

For as great of a QB Eli can be when all the chips are down, how is it that he finds himself in those situations so often? How is it that the Giants fail to make the playoffs consistently, start off 6-2 and tailspin every year, and play down to the level of their competition?

I love Eli and as I've stated, I think this system is holding him back. But there are a lot of very smart people in the Giants front office who have forgotten more X's and O's than I've ever learned-- but at some point, if the system isn't going to change, then we have to accept what we have.

Eli & This Systemi is like a high strikeout, low-average, big home run hitter. He's capable of hitting the big home runs and making the big plays, and with low frequency he will be the most important player of the day. But more times than other great hitters (or QBs) he will bust.

Going forward, I would rather have someone who is always good-to-great and has more big-moment opportunities and take my chances that they will pay off for me.

the last shot stuff was also a bunch of BS. He's played 7-8 fewer years than Kobe and has one fewer game winner in the playoffs on a much better shooting %. It all stemmed from a pass to Donyell Marshall a few years ago which was the right basketball play to make, Marshall just happened to miss an open 3. Jordan makes a pass to Kerr or Paxson and they make the shot and no one says anything. Kobe is an egotistical D-bag and will play hero ball regardless what the defense is doing, which is why even though he shoots like 28% in these situations he gets some sort of weird credit from people.

Who cares? Eli left the field ahead when it mattered...at the end.

I can't believe I have to make a case for Eli's performance in those two Super Bowls. Anyone that expects better than that is goijg to be disappointed, because better doesn't happen.

Peyton has 4 MVPs, and should have won it last year in my opinion as well. AD was great, but a great RB will never be more valuable than a great quarterback. Ever.

it matters because we are talking about a player's ability and about the things he can control.

directly comparable, so throw that out and go back to a point that's been made several times on this thread already. Would you trade Luck for Eli if you were the Colts' GM?

Hell no. Not for Eli plus a 1st round pick...

Anyone here who cannot acknowledge that is seeing through blue tinted lenses.

Lou.. why is it a tired argument? It's a fact. Eli has made plays that Peyton couldn't. I'm as big a Peyton fan as there is but if you're going to ask me who I am taking under center if I need one game winning drive, I am taking Eli. You can have Peyton.

Peyton had a chance to lead the Colts to victory against New Orleans and threw a back breaking pick 6 to Tracy Porter instead. It happened.

When Eli had the same chance, he led his team to a touchdown. Twice.

of 20% years with titles, as fans, we'd be crazy not to take that. Regardless of if the rest of the years are complete whiffs.

Look how much equity the Vikings, Bills and most recently, the Jets have from coming close but not getting the cigar.

Does anyone look at those franchises as winners? Did getting to Championship games or the SB make people think they were winners? Nope. They are looked at as some of the more colossal losers in the league.

Like I said before, some of the people that point to Eli missing the playoffs more often than elite QB's are ones who started looking forward to the next year's draft position during the 2007 and 2011 seasons, and still seem a bit unappreciative of the difficulty there is in winning two titles.

But to break aside from the point at hand entirely... I do know I was one of the vocal ones here in '03 though making that case in Fassell's last year. FMiC you hated the notion, and are now in love with the fruits of it. This is meant to say nothing other than the concept of rooting for a step back to take two forward isn't silly. Although i would not have agreed with those who felt it was appropriate in the two years you mentioned

us at a stalemate:

Quote:

FMiC , I know, you know, we all know the situations aren't so BlueLou : 4:50 pm directly comparable, so throw that out and go back to a point that's been made several times on this thread already. Would you trade Luck for Eli if you were the Colts' GM? Hell no. Not for Eli plus a 1st round pick... Anyone here who cannot acknowledge that is seeing through blue tinted lenses.

If I'm the Giants GM, I'm not trading Eli for Luck. Does that mean I'm looking through Colt Blue tinted lenses?

Argung the inverse of a situation and hypotheticals in what dissolves into a way to diminish two SB rings really is a waste of energy.

I would still hate the idea of losing to get a better draft pick. The '04 draft turned out that way because of the tenacity of Accorsi and the stupidity of the Chargers. Nobody saw that coming. Not Fassel. Not you. Not me.

Frankly, I was not an Accorsi fan, but his legacy is what left the Giants with Eli. For that alone, I have to cede that I was wrong.

to acknowledge that Peyton has had a better career, and is to date the better QB. It isn't even close.

Go look at the total career game winning drive chart sometime, it was linked here recently.

FMiC, hey I'm not relinquishing what Eli's already accomplished. I'm trading for future anticipated value, like swapping stocks.

you would simply be doing an awful job. You have a chance at propping your window of opportunity open for possibly another decade, you would owe it to the organization to explore it.

then thank the Big Electron that the Indy GM's DNA isn't in your gene pool.

Yes, and it was incredibly favorable in Eli's regard. So I'm not sure what your point is there.

I didn't say Peyton wasn't a better overall player. What I said was that if I can have one guy when all I get is one drive to win a game, I am taking Eli and I'm not thinking twice. And his ability in those situations are exactly why he has 2 rings on his finger while conversely, Peyton's are why he doesn't have more than 1. Hence.. my earlier comment.

I never said Eli was better than Peyton career-wise.

And I'm glad he's a Giant but the arguments being made here are worthy of Eagles fans quite frankly.

but i was sure we would be in a better position to make something bold happen if we were to lose a few meaningless games at the end of a bad year with a lame duck coach who was on his way out anyway. The worst thing that team could have done was go 7-9 instead of 4-12. And you could say the same for 1980. Win a meaningless game or two and LT may be a Jet, and the Parcells era is very different. Might have felt good for 3 hours to beat Washington or Oakland in meaningless games in the final two weeks of the 1980 season, but im happy those old enough to watch that season were robbed of short term gratification for the longer term payoff

Sometimes it is better to take a step back to make two forward. I think in 03 it was never more appropriate. 2007 and 2011 never rose to those situations though. Those teams were in playoff contention just about all year

I may rather have Eli over Peyton for one final drive, I would rather have Peyton for the game since the chances are far, far better that we aren't in the position where we need a 2-minute drill game-winning drive if Peyton quarterbacked the other 58 minutes. And I use the same logic for why I would rather have Peyton for a season, since we are far less likely to need to win one singular game where a 2 minute drill is needed for all the marbles.

has a time machine, "exploring" a situation like this isn't easy. You have to make the assumption that Luck is a great QB, will stay a great QB and will be durable, well past what one year has shown.

With Eli, you already have that data to look at.

It seems to me that in your mind, a GM who doesn't make the trade is doing a horrible job, because you already have a position of what you think a GM should do. I know what I'd do and that's good enough for me since the question asked in the OP is:

"Would you swap Eli for Luck right now"

each year wins the SB.

Of those odds 11 QB's in the history of the game have won 2 SB's.

Only 4 QB's have won 3. 2 have won 4.

Only 8 QB's have even appeared in 3 SB's
Only 5 QB's have even appeared in 4 SB's.

As much as I like Eli, the odds are against him winning a 3rd just based on probability forgetting about talent, luck (not the QB), or anything else.

If you can get younger, cheaper, and not sacrifice a lot (or anything - TBD) in quality you need to do it for your team.

And Eli being the team guy he is will support this.

you keep discussing odds. I have no idea why. Your initial introduction of odds was based on faulty logic and continues to be. Not to mention, odds don't factor into this argument at all.

You have no basis to say from an odds standpoint that the Colts are more likely to win a SB than the Giants. Why you keep going down that path is bewildering.

His post seasons kind of feel like he underperformed. The year he did win a Super Bowl, he was underwhelming compared to what he was posting up during the regular season.

would give the Giants that big a lead. Our defense might have something to say about that.

that Luck is going to have an incredible career. I swear I was reading the same things about Sam Bradford when he came out.

Did you happen to forget that Peyton was a few years older and coming off of a serious neck surgery?

Do you think those should be factored in?

the concept of probability. The odds of a QB winning 3 SB's isn't diminished in any single year due to probability. It doesn't happen that often because of a lack of longevity, injuries, coaching changes, and the turnover of the other members of the team. When the average career for a player is less than 5 years, that is a much bigger factor in what is probable or not over the long term than comparing any two players in a specific moment in time.

Sorry,.

Sorry,.

post thought that was obvious.

But odds are the reason you do this, not sure what's bewildering about it.

As a GM you have to consider what are the odds you win another championship with Eli. If you feel confident you will win today and the future of your team isn't leveraged to the point you would need a major rebuilding to stay competitive you don't do this trade.

But since the Colts GM proposed this trade to you, then you have to consider, now that you have Luck, you can free up some cash the next three season, improve your club, and does that increase your odds of winning the SB and more SB's and being competitive for a longer period of time. If it does you make the trade.

If you're not basing it on odds or probability or some other quantifiable metric you're probably not considering it the way most front offices would.

hypothetical. But if you have a shot at getting much younger, coupled with the luxury of swapping for a QB on a rookie deal, and also a kid who has been one of the most anticipated prospects since Peyton, it is a no brainer.

as much as anyone. He's bee one and done'd like 8 times, the majority of them at home and after a bye week. Most times his offense in those games (which was historic perennially) failed to crack 20 points in these ousters. In his one SB winning run, he didn't even play well in the postseason and was largely carried outside of the 2nd half of the AFC title game forward.

And while im no big believer in clutch, I do think there is something to be said for positive and negative reinforcement from past experience in these spots contributing to future play. Plain as day backed up with hardcore data Eli has performed better in late/close spots than he does in all other situations. Inarguable. His confidence has probably snowballed in these spots

But if i had to pick one guy to play one season for us in his prime id have to go with big bro

Quote:

If you're not basing it on odds or probability or some other quantifiable metric you're probably not considering it the way most front offices would.

Like a quantifiable metric of already having won 2 SB's?

that makes sense. We won two super bowls in the past, that means we're going to win another one?

Are you serious?

we'd have zero titles in this era, and likely a different head coach.

No thanks. I've got the Super Bowl newspapers framed in my house. I've got little use for passer ratings and regular season MVPs.

is probably one of the safer assumptions you can make in the NFL.

might be how you buy stocks too, right?

prior results are no guarantee of future performance

I would also take 1 year of Peyton in his prime over 1 year of Eli in his.

But I'd be a lot more nervous once the playoffs rolled around with Peyton under center than I would be if it were Eli. And that's not to say Eli hasn't had his stinkers. He absolutely, 100% has.. but there's a far longer track record of subpar play under #18's name in playoff games.

The reason I'd take Peyton would be because I'd be more confident in him GETTING us to the playoffs. And I'd rather take my chances that way.

This is all hypothetical stuff anyway.

spells without a big time QB. Tark to Simms, Simms to Eli. I've seen too many Pisarciks, Kanells, and Browns. With a good QB you're always in contention, without one, you're dead in the water. If I can get a top QB for 15 years rather than 5 years , I'll take it.

But in this scenario, people realize we wouldn't be trading for the past, just the future, right? We still get to remember 2007 and 2011.

extends your team's "window" for potential titles by 10 years. Assuming all else is equal which of course it isn't...

FMiC your point about Eli's proven durability vs Luck's unknown durability is the best point for not making the deal, IMO. I have no idea if Luck could remain standing (for example) under the brutal beating Eli took from the 9ers in the NFC championship game.

But Luck is supposedly a very, very big workout guy with some very serious athletic tools (like speed) that Eli can't touch. Doesn't address durability though exactly, and I think Eli's durability isn't luck, it's an ability.

Isn;t something to knock a guy for. Being the most valuable player in the entire sport over a span of 4 months is a more impressive accomplishment to me than a hot 3-4 game run. As a fan of the team I'd take the SB runs every time over my guy winning an MVP. But when strictly evaluating the position and the player himself, give the 4 months worth of dominance every time over a flash of brilliance well timed

Was not choosing Luck over Payton, but it was not getting ANYTHING for Payton. That's a lot of draft choices/players they missed(and don't tell me about salary cap/roster bonus' etc. Ways around that).

c'mon, winning two SBs (by making two great drives or any other way) isn't a fooking metric.

That's a little fact you should know.